WordCamp Volunteer Guidelines relating to GPL

In the comments on this post a point was raised that warrants further discussion:

A person works for a marketplace that sells non-GPL WordPress products. They want to help organize or volunteer at a WordCamp.

When vetting all Volunteers for a WordCamp we use the 100% GPL vetting checklist and the GPL Primer We define Volunteers as organizers, speakers, and volunteers. We have a belief that our events should reflect the core projects beliefs and philosophies, especially with regard to the GPL. Anyone associated with WordCamps in a Volunteer role is our representative. It is important that they reflect the projects values. We look at all Volunteers and review and WordPress derivative products and ensure that they are GPL. If not, we ask them if they can change the license to GPL. If they cannot, they cannot be a Volunteer at a WordCamp.

The current rule that requires all WordCamp organisers, speakers, sponsors and volunteers to be 100% GPL compatible, extending to the company that they work for, is one that we cannot currently make an exception for. That’s how it is at the moment and individual exceptions cannot be made right now. Which brings me to the second key point…
While I think I can safely say that we will never change the rule that individuals must be GPL compatible in their personal capacity, there is a valuable discussion to be had with regards to how we handle individuals who are personally compatible, but their employer is not. This is the case that @stephencronin explained above with his employment at Envato. As @kcristiano has stated, this is a discussion better held in a dedicated post and I think it is a discussion that we need to have. I’m not sure what the outcome would be at this stage, but we definitely need to talk about it and make a firm decision that both upholds the principles of the WordPress project and remains as inclusive as possible.

I do agree with @hlashbrooke that we should take a look and decide how to handle individuals who are personally compatible with the GPL license, but work for a Company that is not. We’ll hold this post open until April 3rd for comments. Please chime in with your thoughts.

@bridgetwillard Thanks for your input. I agree with you, the current rules state that if volunteer candidate works for an agency that has distributed products that are both non-GPL and WP derivitives, they cannot be a volunteer.

This discussion is to see how the Community feels about allowing an individual who has all their code/products compliant, but work for a company who is not.

Just to note here (before it becomes a point of discussion) that client work is not included in the GPL requirements. The GPL requirements for WordCamps are about WordPress plugins and WordPress themes that are being distributed, either paid or for free. Client work is entirely different as it is not distributed by the developer in any way, so the licence of work you do for clients doesn’t really matter in this case.

I’ve always been opposed to this policy. When someone volunteers to help out at a WordCamp in any capacity, the person is volunteering, not a business. We should never stifle one’s ability to share time, knowledge, or energy in the WordPress community. A person can espouse the core values of WordPress regardless of their business, plugins, or employment. As long as they don’t bring their non-GPL business into a WordCamp setting, there shouldn’t be any issue. Having such a strict policy is alienating in a community that should be welcoming and open.

As long as they don’t bring their non-GPL business into a WordCamp setting, there shouldn’t be any issue

As an organizer I would request that they not represent the company they work for during the event. Honor system.

… those would be the conditions for me, too. In theory.

We would need to have examples on what a violation would look like, as enforcing this might be a bit tricky.

No handing out business cards, except private contact information?

No “Hi, my name is Mildred and I work for [non-gpl-company]”? Rather say “Hi my name is Milred, I work as a [developer/designer/projectmanage]

and their name should not be mentioned?

What else?
What could organizers say to that volunteer?

Is the strict policy in place because everything else seemed too hard to enforce?
One wanted to keep it on the Global Community Team level to take the grieve, keep it away from the organizers as they have enough to organize?

What I feel would be a good way forward (and this has already been suggested, so this is more of a +1 to that than anything else) would be to allow volunteers to be from non-GPL companies just so long as they don’t use their position as volunteers to promote said company in any way. That would be up to the organisers to manage, but I don’t think it would be too much of an additional burden to be honest.

On the other side of it, I really don’t like the idea of changing the current GPL rules for speakers, sponsors or organisers – even if an individual is personally GPL compatible, but their company is not. I feel that if we change that rule (as some people here and elsewhere have suggested we should) then we begin to undermine the basic principles of the WordCamp program and the WordPress project as a whole, which is not a good situation to be in and is a slippery slope for sure.

I think it is ok that the Guidelines accepts employees of non-GPL companies as WordCamp “Volunteer.”

I think Guidelines should not accept them as organizers, speakers, or sponsors. The community team is proud of the fact we have these people representing WordPress.

I feel that it is difficult to prevent people exchange their company business cards.
When finding it, should they be penalized?
I do not like being someone penalized.
But it may occur when expanding the rules.

Community Deputy Program

Community Deputies are a team of people all over the world who review WordCamp and Meetup applications, interview lead organizers, and generally keep things moving at WordCamp Central. Here are some useful links about the program: